mike stoko [ asug installation member member since: 2003 bob gauthier [ asug associate member member...

MIKE STOKO[ASUG INSTALLATION MEMBER MEMBER SINCE: 2003

BOB GAUTHIER[ASUG ASSOCIATE MEMBER MEMBER SINCE:1998

CHRISTINA CRONE[ASUG INSTALLATION MEMBER MEMBER SINCE: 1999

[

]2010 ASUG Annual Conference ProgramFacilitator Call

Real Experience. Real Advantage.

[ Roles and Responsibilities

Recommend topics Review and select abstracts Complete the entire ranking grid process Review presentations Represent ASUG at the conference and to

speakers


[ 2010 ASUG Annual Conference Critical Dates

The Call for Speakers will be open from Monday, November 2, 2009 to Sunday, November 29, 2009

The 2010 ASUG Annual Conference will be held in the Orange County Convention Center, in Orlando FL, Sunday, May 16-Wednesday, May 19, 2010

YRC and Program Committee Volunteer Meeting, tentatively planned for Sunday, January 24, 2010 and Monday, January 25, 2010 in Atlanta, GA

Receive and complete the ranking grids in early to mid December 2009

Target date to launch the schedule is early to mid February 2010

MIKE STOKO[ASUG INSTALLATION MEMBER MEMBER SINCE: 2003

BOB GAUTHIER[ASUG ASSOCIATE MEMBER MEMBER SINCE:1998

CHRISTINA CRONE[ASUG INSTALLATION MEMBER MEMBER SINCE: 1999

[

]2010 ASUG Annual

Conference Program Strategy


[ Why Do Attendees Come?

Category Scale 2009

Reasons for Attending

Top 5 Gain knowledge regarding SAP products, services, or solutions and how they can enhance my business Understand SAP's vision and strategy for the future and how it aligns with my business strategy Learn how other companies are using SAP solutions to accelerate innovation, energize growth, and achieve clarity Network with other attendees in my industry or line of business who have similar business issues and/or SAP solutions Discover how SAP solutions address trends, resolve issues, and support best practices in my industry

Content is the main reason for attending


[ Content AnalysisMeasure Combined Breakdown ASUG Annual

Conference / SAPPHIRE

Number of sessions 696 (17% fewer than 2008)

506 ASUG (411 breakouts + 95 other)129 SAPPHIRE (99 theater + 30 other)61 Exhibitor sessions

Average session attendance

37 43 ASUG43 SAPPHIRE63 Exhibitor

Sessions with fewer than 25 attendees

246(35% of total)

204 ASUG29 SAPPHIRE13 Exhibitor

Session Quality 3.80 3.81 ASUG3.91 SAPPHIRE3.51 Exhibitor

Sessions rated below 3.5 (good/excellent)

127(18% of total)

84 ASUG16 SAPPHIRE27 Exhibitor

Far too many sessions had low attendanceToo many sessions had low quality ratings


[ 226 Content-Related Comments, Over 80% Fall Under 4 Themes

3

5

6

9

10

10

12

14

26

27

56

74

Late changes / cancellations

Too spread across venue

Timing

Feedback on keynotes

Access to content pre/post event

Misleading descriptions

SAP BusinessObjects

Scheduled simultaneously

4) Need more time for sessions

3) Too general / too much marketing

2) Poor content / not topic I wanted

1) Difficult to find content


[ Overall Summary of Feedback

Content is the main reason for attending Far too many sessions had low attendance Too many sessions had low quality ratings Attendee comments

Difficult to find content Poor content / not topic I wanted Too general / too much marketing Need more time for sessions


[ 2009 ASUG Annual Conference – Evaluation Results Overall Total Conference Attendance continues to

decrease 2007 – 15,150 2008 – 14,751 2009 – 9,793

Mean Session Attendance: 30 Overall Session Mean: 3.76/5 Overall Content Quality Mean: 3.66/5 Topic Relevance to Attendee’s Company Mean:

3.8/5 Presentation Match Expectations Mean: 3.8/5


[ 2009 ASUG Annual Conference – Evaluation Results Overall Attendance

32% had less than 25 attendees 68% had 26-45 attendees 27% had 45+

Highest Attended Sessions (across three days) BITI 1992 out of 57 total sessions

Avg 35 attendees per session SCM 1385 – out of 53 total sessions

Avg 26 attendees per session BI 1346 – out of 36 total sessions

Avg 37 attendees per session Finance 905 – out of 28 total sessions

Avg 32 attendees per session

Lowest Attended Sessions (across three days) Healthcare 27 – out of 3 total sessions

Avg 9 attendees per session Consumer Products 40 – out of 1 session CISUG 78 – out of 3 total sessions

Avg 26 attendees per session Wholesale and Utilities 89 – out of 16 total sessions

Avg 6 attendees per session

Overall Ratings In 2009 the mean rating of educational sessions was rated 3.76 on a 5 point scale. 2009 mean rating has improved over 2008 (3.61) due to implementation of updated ranking grids and

phone screens to select content as part of the ADDIE process. Goal for 2010 session rating - 4.0 or above


[ 2009 Executive Summary – Evaluation Results

Chart Notes/Comments: BusinessObjects sessions are included in the Business Intelligence Community.

2009 ASUG Annual Conference Total Attendance by Community

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Community

Att

end

ance

Total Atten.

Total Atten 27 40 78 89 89 126 137 148 192 193 201 228 325 335 385 515 543 577 610 794 881 905 1346 1385 1992

HCCP

CIS HT UT Ben WS SME AFS EAM Ret PS HOSM

Infl EA CM Port HCM PLM S&S FI BI SCM BITI



Chart Notes/Comments: Most Communities have their peak attendance in 2007. A zero in attendance reflects that Community did not exist that year or attendance was not tracked.

BITI, SCM and BI have been consistently 1000+ total attendees for the past 3 years.

ASUG Annual Conference Attendance Comparison Chart

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Community

Att

end

ance 2009 Attend

2008 Attend

2007 Attend

2009 Attend 27 40 78 89 89 126 137 148 192 193 201 228 325 335 385 515 543 577 610 794 881 905 1346 1385 1992

2008 Attend 0 0 258 151 269 0 322 319 485 0 380 284 0 0 148 852 1151 1170 1276 1509 2515 2019 1233 3186 3334

2007 Attend 0 0 0 287 337 0 243 331 399 0 105 196 0 0 0 1171 1407 1421 1587 1999 2534 2215 2170 3910 4710

HCCP

CISHT

UT Ben WS SME AFS EAM Ret PS HOSM

Infl EA CM Port HCM PLM S&S FI BI SCM BITI



Chart Notes/Comments: 0-5 point scale Overall Mean = mean score of rating of content relevancy, quality of content and matching attendee expectations. Overall Quality = rating of quality of session content The 2009 mean rating (3.76) has improved from 2008 (3.61) due to implementation of updated ranking grids and phone screening to content

selection as part of the ADDIE process. Small/Midsize Enterprises ranks consistently the highest (4.0 and above) in both overall quality and mean; Healthcare consistently ranks lowest

(3.0 or below).

2009 Overall Quality and Overall Mean Comparison by Community

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Community

Rat

ing Overall Qual

Overall Mean

Overall Qual 2.98 3.3 3.33 3.42 3.48 3.71 3.71 3.71 3.74 3.75 3.76 3.79 3.79 3.8 3.82 3.85 3.85 3.87 3.89 3.89 3.93 3.94 3.96 4.02 4.16

Overall Mean 2.89 3.23 3.37 3.41 3.39 3.62 3.7 3.67 3.7 3.74 3.7 3.74 3.72 3.74 3.67 3.81 3.82 3.82 3.82 3.84 3.88 3.91 3.93 4 4.09

HCCP

CIS Port Ben HT RT BI PLM AFS SCM EAM HCM PS UT S&S FI BITI EA CM WS HOSM

Infl SME



Chart Notes/Comments: Chart shows the percent of session in each Community that were rated a 4 or higher for quality content. This is based on a 5 point scale. The following 4 content areas had 50% of their sessions ranked 4.0 or above:

Apparel & Footwear SolutionsSmall/Midsize EnterpriseCustomer ManagementInfluence

2009 ASUG Annual Conference Content Performance

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Community

Per

cen

t o

f S

essi

on

Rat

ed 4

or

Hig

her

Percent > 4

Percent > 4 0 0 0 0 10 21 25 25 25 28.1 30 35.2 35.7 38 37.5 38 40 44.4 44.4 44.6 48.1 50 50 52.6 61.5

HC Ben CISCP

Port SCM HT PS Ret BI HCM PLM S&S EAMSM

UT WS EA HO BITI FI AFS SME CMInfl



Chart Notes/Comments: This chart indicates the percentage of sessions by community that were rated highest in terms of presentation matching expectations. May reflect content selection, abstract description, marketing, and quality of the speaker.

2009 ASUG Annual Conference Content Expectation Match

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Community

Pe

rce

nt

of

Se

ss

ion

Ra

ted

4 o

r H

igh

er

Percent > 4

Percent > 4 0 0 0 0 5 12.512.514.218.418.7 20 21.4 25 25 29.630.332.333.333.336.837.537.5 40 46.1 50

HC Ben CISCP

Port HT PS Ret SCM BI HCM S&S EAM UT FI BITI PLM EA HO CM AFSSM

WS Infl SME



Chart Notes/Comments: This chart indicates the total attendance per Community versus the total number of sessions per Community.

2009 ASUG Annual Conference Mean Attendance and Number of Sessions Comparison

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Community

Nu

mb

er Mean 15 Min Attend

# of Sessions

Mean 15 Min Attend 43.4 22 31.4 28.6 37.5 16 36.1 13.5 24 42 26 28.5 40 24.7 28.8 33.3 30.5 11.1 28.5 28.7 35.5 18.5 41.8 11 27.4

# of Sessions 36 36 36 18 57 27 9 2 8 3 3 21 1 8 21 28 21 8 8 8 41 8 8 8 8

BI PLM S&S EA BITIInfl HO

HC AFSBen CIS

CMCP

EAM Port FI HCM HT PS Ret SCMSMESM UT

WS


[ Recommendations for 2010* Make it easier for attendees to find content they want

Redesign agenda builder and daily planner to support attendee’s education goals, more focus on quality of session metadata

Clarify and simplify session types, tracks, “other” sessions Reduce number of sessions in parallel

Fewer concurrent activities competing for attendees’ attention Enable attendees to enjoy more of the content they want

More session times in agenda footprint More interactive sessions e.g. hands-on

Reduce number of low-attendance sessions Reduce total number of sessions Use attendance data to allocate number of sessions

Reduce number of low-quality sessions More sessions with product education, fewer project overviews Vet speakers for presentation skills

*Currently reviewing viability of recommendations with SAP team.


[ 2010 ASUG Education Program Strategy 2010 ASUG Program Goals*

Increase number of sessions from 9 to 11 Less time between sessions; shorter sessions Decrease number of keynotes

Reduce number of concurrent sessions from ~60 to ~40 Provide attendees with more targeted content approach Lessen the number of content choices for attendees

Increase quality of the content Target specific content not received via call for speakers More deliberate abstract descriptions to clearly lay out

expectations of each session Increase overall session rating from 3.7 to 4.0 or above

More focused approach on overall content design Further enhance speaker development

*Reviewing viability within ASUG Annual Conference and SAPPHIRE Agenda footprint.


[ 2010 ASUG Education Program Strategy

2010 ASUG Program – Timeline

Call for Speakers ASUG Nov 2 – Nov 30 SAPPHIRE Nov 24 – Jan 14

Session Info Posted ASUG – Feb 8 SAPPHIRE Feb 25

Agenda builder Mar 2


[ Challenges

Attendance continues to decline for both events Attendee feedback indicates there is too much

content and activities happening Too many sessions have low attendance

Request 5-6 volunteers for a taskforce to help create options to meet these goals for 2010


[ 2010 ASUG Education Program Strategy

QUESTIONS?


[

]Thank you for participating

mike stoko [ asug installation member member since: 2003 bob gauthier [ asug associate member member...

Documents

real experience

real advantage

total conference attendance

content poor content

low attendance

industry content

business strategy

contentrelated comments